United States of America v. $6,420.00 U.S. Currency et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all persons claiming any right, title or interest in the defendant property are held in default. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant property is hereby forfeited to the United States of America and may be disposed of according to law. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, FOUND AND CERTIFIED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465, reasonable cause existed for the seizure of the defendant property. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for default judgment against the defendant property is GRANTED. (Doc. No. 13.) A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 4/23/15. (JWJ)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
SIX THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED
TWENTY DOLLARS ($6,420.00)
U.S. CURRENCY, and
TWELVE THOUSAND, THREE
HUNDRED EIGHTY DOLLARS
($12,380.00) U.S. CURRENCY
Case No. 4:14CV01696 AGF
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This forfeiture action is before the Court on the motion of Plaintiff, United States
of America, for default judgment against the defendant property, $6,420.00 and
$12,380.00 in United States currency. The defendant property was seized from
Christopher Pyszka and Chrystal Donovan in a March 2013 investigation into a drug
distribution network operating from California to St. Louis. Plaintiff asserts that it was
furnished, or intended to be furnished, in exchange for controlled substances in violation
of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801.
Plaintiff initiated these in rem forfeiture proceedings on October 3, 2014, under 21
U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). Claimant Christopher Pyszka was served with process by way of
certified United States mail on November 6, 2014. On February 23, 2015, notice of
forfeiture was sent to claimant Chrystal Donovan by way of first-class United States mail
at her last known address. Other potential claimants have been notified of this action by
way of publication concerning the action. No claimant has responded to service or
publication. On March 30, 2015 Plaintiff filed a motion for entry of default, and on the
same date, the Clerk of the Court entered such default.
Default judgment is appropriate when “a party against whom a judgment for
affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend . . . and that fact is
made to appear by affidavit or otherwise.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). “It is within the
discretion of the Court to enter a default judgment against a party who has failed to plead
or defend.” Woodbury v. Courtyard Mgmt., Corp., 990 F. Supp. 2d 990, 992-93 (E.D.
Mo. Jan. 8, 2014) (citing United States v. U.S. Currency in amount of $13,000.00, No.
12-00811-CV-C-NKL, 2012 WL 5422316 at *1 (W.D. Mo. Nov. 6, 2012)). “Prior to the
entry of a default judgment, a court should satisfy itself that the plaintiff is entitled to
judgment by reviewing the sufficiency of the complaint and substantive merits of the
plaintiff’s claim.” CitiMortgage, Inc. v. First Residential Mortg. Servs. Corp., No.
4:13CV00703AGF, 2014 WL 721914, at *2 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 24, 2014) (citation omitted).
“Because the liability of a defendant is established upon entry of default, once default is
entered, the plaintiff is not required to further establish its right to recover. Id. Since the
allegations set forth in the complaint are taken as true, the Court is satisfied that Plaintiff
has demonstrated reasonable cause for seizure of the currency in question and that it is
entitled to retain the $6,420.00 and the $12,380.00. Upon review of the record,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all persons claiming any right, title or interest in
the defendant property are held in default.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant property is hereby forfeited to
the United States of America and may be disposed of according to law.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, FOUND AND CERTIFIED that, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2465, reasonable cause existed for the seizure of the defendant property.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment
against the defendant property is GRANTED. (Doc. No. 13.)
A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 23rd day of April, 2015.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?